Also: My Memorandum in Support of My Motion
to Dismiss
This is the latest post in what I
half-jokingly call The Kimberlin Saga®. If you are new to the story, that’s okay! Not
everyone reads my blog. The short
version is that convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin has been harassing me for
over three years, his worst conduct being when he attempted to frame me for a
crime. I recognize that this might sound
like an incredible claim, but I provide video and documentary evidence of that
fact; in other words, you don’t have to believe my word. You only have to believe your eyes. Indeed, he sued me for saying this and lost
on the issue of truth. And more recently
when his wife came to us claiming that this convicted terrorist had threatened
her harm, we tried to help her leave him, and for that, he sued myself, John
Hoge, Robert Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar for helping his wife and he is suing
Hoge, McCain, Akbar, DB Capital Strategies, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck,
Patrick “Patterico” Frey, Mandy Nagy, Lee Stranahan, Erick Erickson,
Breitbart.com, the Blaze, Mercury Radio Arts, Red State, the National Bloggers
Club, and others alleging that we are
all in organized crime for reporting factually about the spate of SWATtings
committed against myself, Frey and Erickson.
So, if you are new to the story, go to this page and you’ll be able to catch up on what has
been happening.
Mmm... popcorn... |
So yesterday, I
shared the Complaint
in Brett Kimberlin’s latest lawsuit against me and my motion to dismiss... the second part of which was kind of a head
fake, because it was just a “rump” motion to dismiss that more or less said, “I
want this court to dismiss this case, and the reasons why are in this other
document.” So, naturally, you probably
want to see that other document. Of
course I am not giving you, again, the massive exhibits that I have already
shared (and as per usual signatures and personal information are being
redacted). Those exhibits were a huge
part of it, too. All and all, I had to deliver
over 500 pages just for the exhibits. I
joked to the clerk that if they had a pool going for the largest filing of the
week, she might have just won. She told
me that it actually wasn’t, they got a filing in a bucket recently, but mine was
in the top ten.
In any case,
here’s the memorandum, sans exhibits, below the fold:
I will repeat
that since Brett essentially filed the same complaint in the now-mostly-defunct
RICO suit, much of what I wrote is recycled from my motion to dismiss and the
reply I filed in that case. But I was
surprised, still, how I was still adding and augmenting in small and big ways
throughout. I don’t know how interesting
any of this would be to regular folks, but I suspect legal geeks like myself
would enjoy a few wrinkles, such as the Stolen Valor Case I mentioned
yesterday. The point of mentioning this
is that just because a part of a section starts to sound familiar doesn’t mean
you have seen all of it before. Whether
that justifies reading all 40+ pages carefully or not, is your call.
As for the
title of this post, asking if Brett just confessed to SWATting... Well, you might have guessed it by reading
this old
post where I argued that Brett Kimberlin had accidentally admitted that he
was a pedophile. There, I was dealing
with a new claim by Kimberlin that we had engaged in invasion of privacy by
publicizing private facts. And I wrote about
how him being a pedophile (as he is estopped from denying) wouldn’t be a
private fact, because it is a crime. But
I also said that there was still something extra funny about the claim that his
pedophilia was a private fact. To quote
myself:
Look,
if I write in a legal brief, “John Doe defamed me by stating X” I am alleging
the following: that the person 1) published a 2) false statement that 3) harmed
my reputation and therefore 4) caused me 5) damage. This might not all be true, but it is what
you are claiming happened, and can be an admission against interest. That is, you are claiming it happened, and
(as appropriate) admitting that that had happened.
So
he is claiming that we engaged in “unreasonable publicity given to private
facts.” The tort has a number of
different ways it is stated. The Uranga
court called it “Invasion of Privacy by Publication of Private Facts.” And in another case, Doe v. U.S. (2000), the court calls it “invasion of privacy by
publication of private facts.” There are
other variations. But whatever you call
it, the elements are the same. From Doe:
a
plaintiff must allege a) that the publicized information contains highly
intimate or embarrassing facts about a person's private affairs; b) that such
information was communicated to the public at large; and c) that the
information is not of legitimate concern to the public
(Emphasis
removed.) And, further, you have to
allege that it d) caused e) damage. So
he is alleging (and admitting) that each and every one of those elements
occurred.
So
he is claiming that by publishing information related to his alleged
pedophilia—my opinion that he is a pedophile, allegations that he seduced his
wife when she only fourteen years old, that he allegedly flew back and forth
from America to the Ukraine to continue that sexual relationship, that he flew
her back to the U.S. when she was only fifteen years old in order to have sex
with her, that while in Maryland they did have sex over fifty times, that once
she walked in on him attempting to seduce her then-twelve-year-old cousin, and
that nine days after her sixteenth birthday they married—amounted to “highly
intimate or embarrassing facts.”
In
other words, he is alleging that all of these things are true.
The
court in Roe states the obvious,
pretty well: “A ‘fact’ is a proposition which correctly describes a state of
affairs in the world. To say that something is a ‘fact’ is necessarily to say
that it is true.”
So
if he is saying that all the allegations that he is a pedophile and has engaged
in underage sex is a “fact” he is admitting that it is true. As the Roe
court noted, no claim for unreasonable publicity of private facts will lie for
a false statement, so the fact he alleged this cause of action means he is
implicitly admitting that all of our allegations related to pedophilia are
true.
So,
it is no longer merely my opinion that he is a pedophile, nor is it just a
subject of estoppel. Now he has actually
admitted it, and as long as that motion is in the docket, he cannot deny it, in
Montgomery County Circuit court, or any other court. After all, the courts do not allow you to
talk out of both sides of your mouth.
Which,
when you think about it, is pretty freaking hilarious. In attempting to punish people for expressing
the opinion that he is a pedophile he has just made a judicial admission—a
Kinsley gaffe, in my opinion—that he
is one.
So, now he is
claiming that somehow that allegations that we allegedly made that he SWATted
us was giving publicity to private facts, so...
is that an accidental confession that it is true?
Well, even
though I despise Kimberlin, I strive to be fair. And in this case, I would say no. Last time, there was no serious, simultaneous
allegation that it was false. Here, his
claim that it is false is all over the complaint. So, hey, you can make up your own mind, but I
won’t call him an admitted SWATter at this point.
Anyway, my primary
goal in writing this is not to entertain you but persuade the judges, but I can hope I have
entertained you, anyway. But my goal is
to persuade the judge, and maybe even get resolution before anyone else files
anything. Brett now has thirteen days
before this is due...
And I am
dangerously low on popcorn…
---------------------------------------
My wife and I
have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist (and
adjudicated pedophile) Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed
and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years. I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you
read starting here,
you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video
evidence. If you would like to help in
the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the donation link on
the right. And thank you.
Follow me at
Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for
snark and site updates. And you can
purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A
Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.
And you can read a little more about my
novel, here.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused
some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice
I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice
system. I do not want to see vigilante
violence against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the
particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that
matter, don’t go on his property. Don’t
sneak around and try to photograph him.
Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision. Your behavior could quickly cross the line
into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not
contact his organizations, either. And
most of all, leave his family alone.
The only
exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course
nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any
stories you might report. And even then
if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request. That this is a key element in making out a
harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you
refuse.
And let me say
something else. In my heart of hearts, I
don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete